Ramirez v. DMV

Filed 3/27/06 Ramirez v. DMV CA2/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Dzintra I. Janavs, Judge. Affirmed.

Fleishman & Fisher and Barry A. Fisher for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Jacob A. Appelsmith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Silvia M. Diaz, Lead Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Laura Lee Gold, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Graeme E. Sharpe and Mark R. Beckington, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent.

_____

Plaintiff Vianey Ramirez, a licensed used car dealer, appeals from a judgment denying her petition for administrative mandamus and upholding the decision of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend her license and her use of special plates for 30 days as discipline for violating provisions of the Vehicle Code which prohibit knowingly making a false statement in an application for registration of a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 11705, subd. (a)(3)), causing a person to suffer loss or damage by reason of a fraudulent representation (Veh. Code, § 11705, subd. (a)(14)), executing a conditional sale contract which was not contained in a single document (Veh. Code, § 11705, subd. (a)(12); Civ. Code, § 2981.9), selling a vehicle without a valid smog certificate (Veh. Code, § 11713, subd. (i)), and failing to submit a valid application for registration of a vehicle within 50 days of the sale date (Veh. Code, §§ 11705, subd. (a)(8), 4456.1, subd. (d), and 4456, subd. (a)(6)).

We affirm the judgment because it is supported by substantial evidence and the penalty imposed by the DMV does not constitute an abuse of discretion.

BACKGROUND^[1]

Ramirez was licensed as a car dealer in July 2000 and conducted her business as a sole proprietorship known as Autos Guadalajara. In January 2003, the DMV filed an accusation against Ramirez seeking to suspend or revoke her license because of Vehicle Code violations involving the sale of three used cars: a 1995 Mustang, a 1995 Windstar, and a 1995 Lincoln Town Car. A hearing on the accusation was held before an administrative law judge (ALJ) in September 2003. The evidence at the administrative hearing established the following:

A. The Mustang

In September 1999, when Pascual Chavira Armendariz and his son purchased a 1995 Mustang, a vehicle transfer form filed with the DMV listed the odometer as reading over 107,000 miles. Armendariz testified that he drove the Mustang every day and put a lot of mileage on it. But he admitted telling a DMV investigator previously that he hardly drove the car. In December 2000, his wife took the Mustang for a smog certification. A Car Fax report listed the odometer reading at the time of the emissions inspection as 38,075 and noted a potential odometer rollback. Armendariz had no explanation for the lower odometer reading on the Car Fax report.

In early 2001, Armendariz traded in the Mustang and purchased the Windstar from Autos Guadalajara. Armendariz paid an additional $1,500 for the Windstar. Armendariz testified that at the time he traded in the Mustang, its odometer read over 130,000 miles. Carlos Cazelly, Ramirez's salesperson, told Armendariz that the mileage on the Windstar (about 139,000) was close to the mileage on the Mustang. In connection with the sale of the Mustang to Autos Guadalajara, Armendariz filled out a Notice of Release of Liability in April 2001 listing the Mustang's odometer reading as 142,834. On February 1, 2001, Autos Guadalajara filed with the DMV a vehicle transfer form listing the odometer reading on the Mustang as 142,892. Armendariz testified that a signature on the transfer form, purporting to be his, was not his signature. Armendariz also denied that he signed an application for transfer of the Mustang's title with duplicate title, which Autos Guadalajara had filed with the DMV.

In May 2001, Sandra Valencia, a first time car buyer, purchased the Mustang from Autos Guadalajara for $6,208.80. She saw the car's odometer reading of about 42,000 miles and was told by Cazelly that the car had low mileage because it had been parked for a long time. Valencia's sale contract listed the odometer reading as 42,892. When Valencia received from the DMV the registration certificate listing the odometer reading as 142,892, she contacted an attorney and spoke with a DMV investigator, Vince Rojas. After Rojas got involved in the case, Valencia was able to return the Mustang for a refund of her purchase price. Valencia testified that she bought the Mustang because it had low mileage; she would not have bought it if she had known the true mileage was over 100,000. According to Valencia, her signature was falsified on the May 5, 2001 vehicle transfer form which listed the odometer reading of 142,892 and a sales price of $2,200. Her falsified signature appeared on the transfer form under the caption â€